15
top 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Nemo@slrpnk.net 36 points 1 month ago

You may think this means that only 5% of people, 1 in 20, will be able to have kids. But actually, it takes two, and if there's no way to predict who can and cannot, it becomes closer to 1 in 400. The 1/20 chance of the male partner being fertile is multiplied by the 1/20 chance of the female partner being fertile.

It's difficult to prove someone infertile, but if someone can conceive a child, that proves their fertility. This is of limited utility in the case of women, but I suppose a man of proven fertility could make a living as a stud, attempting to knock up eligible women. So once you've identified a population of fertile males, you knock that half of the equation back down to a 1/1 and the women can go back to the much better 1/20 odds. Of course, you'd need to re-identify potential studs over time from the newer generations as older ones die off. And unless each woman is having twenty daughters you're still suffering from rapid population decline and the attendant societal collapse.

So, in summary: It'd be real bad, and even if it didn't kill off humanity in a generation it probably would knock us back to the bronze age within a century. And even if we somehow manage to dodge that it will still change human society permanently in unpredictable ways.

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 25 points 1 month ago

Pros: No more people.

Cons: No more people.

[-] Fleur_@lemm.ee 18 points 1 month ago

Dw op it's just a phase. You'll grow out of it

[-] FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Cons - lack of normal workforce replenishment ~18-20 years after plague would cripple economies, social safety nets and essential government spending (state pensions, road upkeep, military). Demographic would skew older and older with each year limiting democratic governments ability to pass any kind of rescue legislation until it's too late (assuming an increasingly older population votes in their own interest, being unable to work to help fix massive labour shortages, as so defensively protect government programs for elderly that government can no longer afford)

Pros - I mean, what counts as a 'pro'? Less pollution as the world economy collapses I guess..

[-] beliquititious@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 month ago

A significant reduction in the population leads to better outcomes for the survivors. Mass death events in history, such as both world wars and the various pandemics, are usually (but not always) followed by a period of progress and prosperity.

Humans breed faster than their civilizations can keep up with and in the modern era scarcity is artificially created by arbitrary ownership of natural resources. Fewer people means more resources per person.

However if your hypothetical pandemic were to strike, it would create a problem the world has never encountered before (at least as far as I can find) so predicting what might happen is basically guess work. Given how violent brutes tend to be more successful in scarce environments, the outcome would be very grim.

[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 12 points 1 month ago
[-] dabaldeagul@feddit.nl 10 points 1 month ago

Pro: less overpopulation in the long term.

Cons:

  • more old than young people

  • economy collapses

  • society collapses

  • we're done for basically

[-] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago

Con: Fertility value sky rockets resulting in either a society led by the fertile or led to force the fertile to breed. Ala hands maid's tale. Con: hand maid's tale

[-] RBWells@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

The world would be filled with old people.

You are thinking it would just be a gentle way to reduce population but even if women did artificial insemination to keep your 1/20 birthrate, the world as you know it needs a lot of people to run it - farmers, network engineers, maintaining all the systems that make your comfortable existence possible requires a baseline population with particular skills, of working age. There is a reason technology increased with population growth.

The natural world would be better off, probably. Humans would be in for a rough ride, and would probably die out.

[-] DragonsInARoom@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago
[-] 11111one11111@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

They did. A sterilizing one.

[-] Lumidaub@feddit.org 3 points 1 month ago

What are the pros and cons of a disease that leaves people sterile? Uh.

Con: it's a disease.

[-] Stern@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Pro: Group projects in school drop dramatically.

[-] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

You just see Children of Men or something?

[-] stinky@redlemmy.com 2 points 1 month ago

Need more context

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

If it's a one-generation thing, you will see some (or perhaps a lot of) social upheaval and a lot of artificial insemination/stud services, leading to a relatively brief dip in the population. Seriously, look up when Earth reached 1 billion people, and we're closing in on 9 billion now. If it's every generation, humanity will go extinct. Each fertile woman would have to have over 40 children to maintain population levels.

[-] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 month ago

Humanity is already seeing the global birth rate drop to replacement rate, we're expected to hit it within the century and keep dropping. Relatively brief dip? More likely our extinction even if it was only a single generation

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

There's good evidence humanity was down to the tens of thousands before, yet here we are. Source. I'm not saying we're guaranteed to get through it if it happened again, but a drop to half a billion people wouldn't even necessarily cause a significant reduction of genetic diversity.

[-] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

Fair. Less the extinction of humanity and more the end of any trace of civilisation

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

If an event like this happened, we could easily maintain most of the trappings of civilization with a little effort and cooperation. So yeah, you're probably right.

[-] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

Cynicism aside, civilisation as it is today requires extremely specialised knowledge. Losing 95% or more of our population would put an end to our capability to support any kind of advanced infrastructure. It'd be akin to the decline of Rome, from the biggest city in the world to having farmers farming in the former city area and mining the old buildings for building material. Humanity would be back to scavenging and farming as core activities within a generation.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

This is kind of like saying, "What if only America existed?" There would certainly be some disruption, but it wouldn't exactly be the end of civilization. Now, randomly distribute those people across the world, and it gets harder. But. The hypothetical plague didn't kill 95% of the population, it made them infertile. That gives you decades to prepare and recover if you're aware of the problem.

this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2024
15 points (64.7% liked)

Ask Lemmy

27391 readers
1202 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS